I figured it was better to err on the side of caution, for a story whose whole point is its surprise twist ending. The age of the story is irrelevant: no matter how old a story is, there are still plenty of people who haven’t read it yet.
Perhaps similarly, for almost everybody who watches The Empire Strikes Back for the first time nowadays, there are two things they do know going in: what Yoda looks like, and “Luke, I am your father.” [/tangent]
FWIW, I teach DJ&MH pretty regularly (in a survey course for college sophomores through seniors, most of whom are not humanities majors), and a significant number of them do not start the work already knowing that. If you don’t read a lot, it’s pretty easy to reach the age of twenty or so without knowing stuff that “everybody knows,” and the fact that Jekyll and Hyde are described as being so different in age, size, and physical appearance tends to throw them off the scent.
I like the fact that, for these two movies, they can be completely enjoyed using either assumption. They work as straight actioners as well.
Wait, are you saying Yoda is Luke’s father?
Can you teleport, too? That feels stranger.
It makes you feel all tingly inside!
Well, you fold reality inside of you, then fold yourself after it. Then you unfold it all with yourself in another position.
So, yeah, lots of tingly.
But you don’t even have to read DJ&MH to know the twist. There have been so many references to the story since 1886 that even now, most people over the age of 8 should know it by cultural osmosis.
Getting back to the OP, I feel obligated to again provide a link to a relevant TV Tropes page.
I’m not sure if pkbites’s post is tongue-in-cheek or not, but I certainly didn’t care in the game. It’s a 1980s platformer. I don’t expect a coherent storyline or much of a narrative at all other than jump on things and beat the mini-bosses and final boss.
I’ve won that game probably a few dozen times and don’t remember that it was an “it’s all a dream” ending as, so what? I won the game! I rocked that slot machine though! Got the timing down so I could get 3 cherries (+5 lives) almost every time.
<Brain Bleach applied after an image of Yoda & Natalie Portman arrives unwelcome in my mind>
“Much hotter, back in the day, I was.”
And everyone seems to think that Mr. Hyde is a hulking monster, while in the book, Dr. Jekyll is tall, fit,and handsome, while Hyde is shorter and weaker (and weird-looking in a hard to define way).
I’m seriously stunned that anyone could reach college age and not be aware of who Jekyll and Hyde are. It would be like somebody not having heard of Sherlock Holmes or Tarzan or Dracula. The characters have gone beyond their original works and the adaptations of those works and entered our culture as popular metaphors.
I’m quite surprised too. I’ve never read the book or seen any of the movies, but I knew the basic Jekyll/Hyde concept by grade school. I guess popular metaphors aren’t always as long-lasting as we think they are.
Heh, I was expecting the spoiler to be a Shakespeare play.
And everyone seems to think there’s a “The” in the title.
<Brain bleach applied after an image of Natalie Portman or anyone else doing anything at all in the Star Wars prequels>
At least your image would be interesting in some way rather than stultifying. (In other words imagining coitus between Yoda and Amidala is potentially less painful than actually experiencing those movies again.)
Seriously. Don’t kids watch Bugs Bunny cartoons anymore? This the western canon we’re talking about.
It was the best friend/closest confidant working against you the whole time!
These days I just assume that if a protagonist has a friend at all they are the bad guy. I’ve yet to be wrong.
There’s the “Wendy Theory”, which posits that Shelley Duvall’s character Wendy in The Shining was the crazy and abusive parent rather than Jack Nicholson’s Jack. Most of the theory hinges on the numerous continuity errors in the finished movie, where any time there is a scene that differs from an earlier one in the same place – like disappearing furniture or a light switch present in an early scene but missing later – that indicates it’s actually Wendy’s delusion rather than having actually taken place. After all, Stanley Kubrick was such a meticulous director that he would never allow continuity errors to creep into his work. This ignores the real-world problems that plagued production, most notably the fire that hit Elstree Studios necessitating that the set rebuilt. This also ignores the continuity errors present in Kubrick’s other work, like Eyes Wide Shut.
[Also, the final scene where Jack is shown frozen to death couldn’t be true because that amount of snow couldn’t possibly fall overnight. 
Jack is hardly covered in an inch of snow. It’s obvious that the author has never been anywhere with an appreciable about of snowfall.]
Rather than dignify the author of the Wendy Theory by linking to it, I’ll instead link to a video where it is extensively refuted.
